Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30116963›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2019

Extra-target low-risk prostate cancer: implications for focal high-intensity focused ultrasound of clinically significant prostate cancer.

A Annoot, J Olivier, P Valtille, V Deken, X Leroy, P Puech, A Villers

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Available evidence on HIFU for focal treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. MRI-targeted biopsies: What's next?World journal of urology · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

A AnnootDepartment of Urology, CHRU Lille, Lille University, Lille, France. annootarthur@gmail.com.
J OlivierDepartment of Urology, CHRU Lille, Lille University, Lille, France.
P ValtilleDepartment of Urology, CHRU Lille, Lille University, Lille, France.
V DekenDepartment of Biostatistics, University Lille, CHU Lille, EA 2694, 59000, Lille, France.
X LeroyUniversity Lille, 59000, Lille, France.
P PuechUniversity Lille, 59000, Lille, France.
A VillersDepartment of Urology, CHRU Lille, Lille University, Lille, France.
Université de Lille · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRInserm · FROnco Lille · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo analyse the impact of the presence of extra-target non-clinically significant cancer (NCSC) after high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) hemiablation on oncological results. To analyse radical treatment free survival (RTFS) rates at 2-3 years follow-up.

methodsRetrospective single-centre study of 55 patients treated by primary HIFU hemiablation from 2010 to 2016. Inclusion criteria were unilateral MRI detected CSC, stage ≤ T2b, Gleason score (GS) ≤ 7, at least 6 mm distant from prostate apex. MRI with systematic and targeted biopsies was performed at diagnosis. Follow-up included clinical examination, PSA every 6 month, MRI and biopsies at 1 year and in case of PSA elevation. HIFU retreatment was possible. Whole-gland treatment was indicated in case of positive biopsies with GS ≥ 7 or maximum cancer core length > 5 mm, any GS.

resultsMean follow-up was 33 months (SD: 17-49 months). Presence or not of an extra-target NCSC in the untreated part of the gland had no impact on RTFS at univariate analysis (p = 0.29). 10 (18%) patients had a salvage whole-gland treatment after a median follow-up of 26 months (IQR 17-28). RTFS at 2 and 3 years were 92% and 80%.

conclusionPresence or not of an extra-target NCSC in the untreated part of the gland had no impact on RTFS. NCSC lesion can be left untreated and actively monitored. RTFS was 80% at 3 years which support the concept of focal/partial treatment as a treatment option of CSC prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Follow-Up StudiesHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesSalvage TherapySurvival AnalysisTreatment OutcomeUltrasound, High-Intensity Focused, TransrectalFocal therapyHigh-intensity focused ultrasoundIndex lesionProstate cancerSecondary lesion

Identifiers

PMID30116963
OpenAlexW2886203714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.